IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2014-15]

Kishan Kumar Gupta Vs ITO H.No.599, Hanuman Mandir, Ward-2(1)(3)

Ambedkar Park, Jhandapur, Ghaziabad I.E. Sahibadbad, Ghaziabad-201010 PAN-AYVPG6708N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by Shri Sahil Sharma, Adv. &

Shri Sanjay Parashar, Adv.

Revenue by Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 22.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement 20.02.2026

ORDER

PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM :

The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 07.11.2023 by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“ld. CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. CIT(A), Noida-1/10041/2019-20 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising from the penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) dated 15.03.2019 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15.

2. The appeal is delayed by 55 days for which an application for condonation of delay alongwith affidavit was filed as per which the assessee was suffering from prolonged illness and was bed-ridden. In support, copy of the medial reports and the fitness certificate issued by the Government hospital are filed with condonation petition. It is thus, requested that delay may be condoned as the circumstances were beyond the control of the assessee as he was medically unfit during the period from 07.10.2023 to 23.07.2025.

3. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue submits that assessee though was confined to bed due to illness however, he can direct the Counsel through telephonic mode for filing the appeal on behalf of the assessee which was not done. Therefore, a prayer is made for not condoning the delay.

4. After considering the submissions made by assessee and from the perusal of the recorded produced before us, it is seen that assessee was getting medical treatment under Medical Officer of Government Hospital, Ghaziabad and concerned Doctor has issued fitness certificate to the assessee on 25.07.2025. Therefore, we find that assessee has sufficient and reasonable cause in filing the appeal delayed. Accordingly, delay is hereby, condoned and appeal of the assessee is admitted for adjudication.

5. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is engaged in the business of vegetables and e-filed his return of income on 18.07.2014, declaring total income of INR 3,92,730/-. The case was selected for ‘complete scrutiny’ through CASS on the reason that “cash deposit in saving bank account(s) is more than the turnover”. Subsequently, statutory notice issued u/s 143(2) dated 28.08.2015 was issued followed by notice u/s 142(1) of the Act alongwith detailed questionnaire. In response, assessee furnished written submission alongwith details and documents alongwith cash book which was not found genuine and acceptable. Thereafter the AO assessed income of the assessee at INR 84,17,900/- vide assessment order dated

30.11.2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act.

6. Against the said order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 07.11.2023, dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

7. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:-

1. “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned penalty order dated 15.03.2019 passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer ("A.O.") u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") imposing a penalty of Rs.31,65,780/- is arbitrary, bad in law and liable to be quashed.

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the show cause notice dated 30.11.2016 issued u/s 274 r.w.s 271 of the Act, does not specify whether the penalty is proposed for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, as required u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. This fundamental defect renders penalty order legally invalid.

3. That on the facts and